User talk:Bidgee/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Aimee Murch

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Uranquinty Power Station'

Hi. The article 'Uranquinty Power Station' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://www.livenews.com.au/Articles/2009/01/19/ORGs_Uranquinty_Power_Station_goes_online_

• You added this in January 2009.
• The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots|deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 00:04, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Alinta

There is discussion about the update the Australian energy company Alinta article and its connection to Alinta Energy. Your input to clarify these issue and update these articles is appreciated. Beagel (talk) 09:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Melbourne

I'd like to see my image on Wikipedia page. I removed the two others because they are both old as well and don't really illustrate contemporary Melbourne as a whole, just the Docklands, and replaced them with newer image of the skyline. I took the image specifically to use to illustrate Melbourne on Wikipedia site, why is it removed? Ericardo1979 (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but age doesn't matter in this case! Sure the photos are at least five to six years old but you photo is far less quality and low resolution then the ones you're removing. The two photos you removed (without discussion on the talk page of the article) are high resolution and quality, infact all of them is featured on Wikipedia and one on Commons. If you expect that your photo should be here, then you need to make sure it is better then the one you're replacing but sorry it isn't good enough as I've stated here, the edit summary and the article's talk page. Bidgee (talk) 14:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding my Melbourne image

I have left a few comments regarding my photo of Melbourne and Port Phillip on talk page. Ericardo1979 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC).

Copyright ?

Huh??? Copyright error?? Didn't I state the source as myself accurately?? --Ashton 29 (talk) 08:51, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't your photograph, like the others. Bidgee (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Metroad_6

Hi. Just a quick note to let you know that the edits you reverted at Metroad_6 by Mapaholic27 although uncommented removal of data, looks quite correct. I'll restore the edits, and add appropriate revision comments. Thanks. --Inas66 (talk) 23:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Australian Wood Duck

Please don't undertake highly contentious changes without discussion. There is a long-established and accepted convention that bird species are always capitalised on Wikipedia. If you disagree with that convention, get it changed, don't just unilaterally change one of more than 9,000 bird articles to lc. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Please discuss don't just keep reverting contra a policy exception you haven't even bothered to check. At least wait until I can get you the links Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Watch out for WP:3RR you two. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 14:56, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Block notice

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 15:04, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Bidgee (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

One sided block as the blocking admin has failed to block the other editor and the other Admin also abused there tools and breaches WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Bidgee (talk) 15:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Umm, why do you both think the other editor wasn't blocked? SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have blocked both editors. Also, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_for_move_warring; please let me know if you would like me to paste a comment there. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 15:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Bidgee (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

One sided block as the blocking admin has failed to block the other editor and the other Admin also abused there tools and breaches WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Bidgee (talk) 15:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Umm, why do you both think the other editor wasn't blocked? SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

According to User:Jimfbleak's block log, he was unblocked for agreeing to "avoid the articles for now". If you make the same agreement, I see not reason not to treat the situation exactly the same.--v/r - TP 16:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I cannot agree on "avoid the articles for now", far too broad as it would mean I can't edit nor comment in any move discussion. Also seems wrong for the Admin to be unblocked since they know that others in the Bird project will do the dirty work anyway. Bird project will not show any diffs to a broad or site wide consensus for the IOC names and the capitaisations, only stuff I've seen has been local. Jimfbleak used the rollback tool on Australian wood duck [1] and [2]. Bidgee (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm also concerned that ErikHaugen is far more talkative on Jimfbleak's talk page but not on mine? This is really was a punitive block. Bidgee (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I've tried to respond to everything both of you have said. I don't think anyone is asking you to avoid move discussions, or RfCs at WP:CAPS, etc. I'm certainly not. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I cannot agree on "avoid the articles for now"—Would you at least agree to stop reverting without a chance for discussion? ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:02, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Bird project uses its talk page to revert contested renames and also uses the talk page to get involved (those whom are part of the Birds project) Admins to move them if a non-Admin has a "road block". I should have the right to restore the name as it was (ie: Australian Wood Duck rather then Maned Duck) or per WP:COMMONNAME. Bidgee (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Again you've not addressed the fact the block is punitive one. Bidgee (talk) 17:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Seems that Jimfbleak is treated like a king and I'm treated like a fucking criminal. Bidgee (talk) 17:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

The block isn't punative when you will not agree to "stop reverting without a chance for discussion." That makes it a preventative block. If you agree to stop move warring, you will be unblocked. It's as simple as that. You hold the power to unblock. Quit the disruptive actions and you'll be unblocked. Please explain how on earth that can be construed as not preventative? (Or simply agree to quit move warring, and I'll unblock you).--v/r - TP 17:26, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

(ec)I don't know how to address the punitive issue. I blocked to stop the endless string of rapid page moves and reverts; that is the only reason. I unblocked Jimfbleak because he agreed to stop and even avoid the pages, I would be more than happy to unblock you if you would agree to stop reverting moves without discussion. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Bidgee—it's true that BIRDS is quite vigilant about reverting moves to lowercase. Usually someone drops a note on the talk page of the editor who originally moved a page to lowercase, eg here, letting the user know about the ponderous amount of discussion that has taken place on this issue. I don't think the consensus for uppercase is nearly as broad as it is made out to be, but it does seem like some discussion would need to take place before we start moving articles to the correct lowercase version en masse. I believe that was in essence the point Jim was trying to make to you. They do occasionally make moves of lots of pages as names change; I think these are generally seen as uncontroversial and sure, admins are enlisted to help carry these out if there's an {{R caps}} in the way or something. Regarding Australian Wood Duck vs. Maned Duck; I'm a bit confused—are you saying it should be at Maned Duck? I don't think anyone wants to stop you from opening any RMs along these lines. Or just moving pages and then opening an RM if someone objects in order to get wider discussion. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

While I agree that my actions where not the best, I again can't agree with "stop reverting moves without discussion" since this will prevent me from moving an article bsck to its original even once, let alone twice. Bidgee (talk) 17:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Come back Bidgee - You do good work - we need you. Get unblocked and work it out with more discussion. - Youreallycan 16:16, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I will not come back while a project highjacks articles on a so called consensus which they will not discuss (this goes back a bit), breaches WP:LOCALCONSENSUS and uses its own Admins whom are part of the Bird project to move articles that clearly the local name is far more commons. Bidgee (talk) 16:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm certainly sympathetic to your point about local consensus, but we can't resolve it this way. I don't think Jimfbleak used any administrative functions in all this, by the way; as far as I can tell Jim wasn't acting as an admin at all. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:00, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

He did use the delete tool. Bidgee (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm; perhaps you are right. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Doc9871 for reverting the troll(s) rubbish, would give a barn star to you but can't. Bidgee (talk) 16:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC) As of today, I'll no longer be contributing to any Wikimedia project, that also includes Commons where I still have a backlog of photographs that were to be uploaded. I see know point when long term editors get treated like shit. I see no point any more. Bidgee (talk) 17:27, 28 June 2012 (UTC) WTF? I'M NOT FUCKING STIRRING DRAMA FFS.Bidgee (talk) 17:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Bais

Because I pointed out that the block is purely preventative and explained how you have complete control of it, you reverted it as bias? Ok, I'm out. Obviously you intend to stir drama that hold yourself accountable for clear move warring. I can't be arsed to waste my time on you.--v/r - TP 17:33, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

block

While I agree that my actions where not the best, I again can't agree with "stop reverting moves without discussion" since this will prevent me from moving an article bsck to its original even once, let alone twice.—Fair enough. Can you agree to only revert moves as part of a "bold-revert-discuss" cycle? ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

IE: (1RR), yes but the Bird project need to also cease the disputed moves. Also TParis, get your fact right. I never said I wasn't in the wrong. Bidgee (talk) 17:57, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Darwin, a GA?

I have completed the Darwin, Northern Territory checklist, can you quick scan the article and tell me whether it could pass as a GA or not? Oakley77 (talk) 01:07, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kristen Veal

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

map

Hay um the png. map was locked so only admins can use it, so on the next month can i tell you what to change? Thanks by! :) --Ty Rezac (talk) 18:25, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

For Commons stuff, please use my Commons user talk page. Just tell me when you want it unprotected so you can update it. Bidgee (talk) 13:26, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Samantha Richards

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Notification

WikiThanks

I have mentioned you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Evidence#Reply to questions by Fæ. If you wish to comment please take note of the guidelines at the top of the page and either the same page or Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Workshop may be suitable. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 09:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC) Fæ (talk) 09:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Request for discussion

Per [3] please see Talk:Regional effects of global warming#Include Upfront (magazine) endangered oceanic island nations ranking. 141.218.35.38 (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:CANVASS, you should probably ignore this... — Arthur Rubin (talk) 07:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

You might want to re-read WP:LISTED

Hello, you might want to review WP:LISTED because being listed on an exchange does not exempt an article about an organization from being speedily deleted. If the article does not assert notability nor have references showing it (as was the case with the Qube Logistics article at the time of its nomination) then the article is in fact a candidate for speedy deletion. Thanks.    Thorncrag  11:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I didn't base it on being listed on the ASX but to the fact that it did have one primary source and two newspaper sources (per WP:LISTED), therefore speedy deletion isn't appropriate. It was best to tag it with refimprove and if nothing was done within a week or two then list it for AfD. Bidgee (talk) 11:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Nuclear Warfare Barnstar

Being a graphic designer, I was wondering if you could help me. I award the File:Nuclear Barnstar.png to wikipedians who help me with nuclear articles. However, it looks so-so with its black and white background. I was wondering if you could create a new version with a colour version, say one from commons:Category:Mushroom clouds? Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I see what I can do, been rather busy with assignments. Still got an assignment to finish, go to an event where Tim Storrier is guest speaker, heading to RAAF Museum at Point Cook, possible viewing of the F-111 (A8-142), maybe going to the 100 years of Turning on the Water at Yanco on top of clearing the photograph backlog! Bidgee (talk) 14:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Hanna Zavecz

The DYK project (nominate)) 00:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Of Canadians?

Can you please let me know when the Canadian has decided to de-colonise Australia? Until that's done, I'm not going to return because I'm tired of it. The last straw was telling me to work on his work, which he should have done three months ago, instead of working on Bieber. I wasn't doing much more than discussing an anti-Bieber image at the time related to Bieber. I was otherwise working on Rwanda women's national football team which is at GA, working on Paralympic related content, had spent the day completing the last of the women's national football team articles from around the world, and had completed a number of WP:DYK reviews and nominations. In Australian space, I don't like having to explain every single Australian thing, nor having the time of day challenged. Can you please ask him to leave? If he pays membership dues, I'd be more than accepting of him but he has ZERO desire to do so, while at the same time he takes up a lot of time to deal with and giving us zero back in return. --LauraHale (talk) 06:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

RFAR Perth opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth/Evidence. Please add your evidence by November 26, 2012, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Perth/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 18:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Suzy Batkovic

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Abby Bishop

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Census updates

Hi Bidgee. Good to see someone working on updating the census figures. Just so you know, instead of using the standard ref template such as here you can use {{Census 2011 AUS}} for this purpose. Cheers, Mattinbgn (talk) 00:38, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, now that my assignments are now handed in, I have some free time at long last! Never knew it already existed! Bidgee (talk) 02:26, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Gaol, jail

I don't really have any argument with this edit per se but your edit summary has me worried. We should not be switching to Australian English in an article because a particular section is discussing Australia. WP:ENGVAR requires any given article to consistently use the same variety of English throughout, and we should therefore not keep switching varieties between British, American, Australian etc sections. SpinningSpark 10:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I was raising a point, yes I know about WP:ENGVAR. Article is US "focused" and US spelling to be used, something that the Australian English has in common is the spelling of jail which was the point I was trying to make. Bidgee (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I've always wondered why they would pronounce "gaol" as "jail". It looks like it should be pronounced like in the Flintstones theme song, "...we'll have a gay ol' time." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Using g to represent /dʒ/ is not especially British. Numerous words have this pronounciation in American English; gentle, geology, rage, merge, deluge etc etc. See G#Usage. SpinningSpark 12:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Your examples are all "g" followed by "e", which is typically pronounced "je", although "get" is an exception. But "g" followed by "a" and pronounced "ja"? Besides "gaol", the only ones that come to mind are "margarine" and "Sacagawea", although I think there are doubts about both the proper spelling (if any) and the pronunciation of her name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Birds

the Bird project need to also cease the disputed moves—You and I might disagree with them, but their moves are backed up by a lot of discussion. Usually they maintain the status quo in a more collegial manner; I don't know what they could be doing differently, in general. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:52, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

They ignore the WP:COMMONNAME and try and make out as if IOC names are policy here with naming, I've seen no discussion with the community other then within the project itself and also ignoring WP:LOCALCONSENSUS in the process. If they want IOC naming then they will need to do an site wide RfC to gain a consensus on the matter, for now the project should cease on moving articles where the names are spelt differently or a known as under a different name. I do apologise with the way I acted lastnight/this morning, I was rather angry and have since taken a few hours off (away from the computer) to cool off, however I'm disappointed with the way some Admins acted on ANI. Bidgee (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't want to belabor the issue since yesterday's actions are presumably in the past, but I do want to point out that the site wide WP:TITLE policy which includes WP:COMMONNAME also includes WP:LOWERCASE, which acknowledges the bird capitalization exception, i.e, "See also the special rules on capitalization in bird naming" (link included in the policy). Rlendog (talk) 14:56, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Just before I head off for the night, I'm currently not talking about the "lower case" issue but more the IOC naming. In regards to lower case, WP:CAPS never stated that bird names must be uppercase "A possible exception is common names of birds, for which WP:WikiProject Birds proposes that the initial letter of each word be capitalized (but not after a hyphen)." no where does it state, no where on the pages linked I can see the consensus (discussion) from the community, not the best to have Wikipedia:Naming conventions (birds) on the project page (since if, and I mean if it has consensus) as it makes it seem to be a project/local consensus being there rather than being on its own page unconnected to the project and the policies/guidelines you've posted contradict since one page WP:CAPS states "possible exception" and then "special rules on capitalization" in WP:LOWERCASE but reading Wikipedia:Naming conventions (birds) doesn't state that that it must be or should be used. Bidgee (talk) 15:44, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I have followed the animal capitalization drama in the context of mammals rather than birds, so I do not where all the discussions have been. But it has been discussed several times at WP:MOS, one example which I do know of is here. Rlendog (talk) 16:05, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Bidgee, you're preaching to the choir regarding local consensus and the deification of the IOC. I'll note, though, that the capitalization issue at least has been discussed outside of BIRDS; in addition to Rlendog's links there's the archives of Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. I imagine it will be discussed again someday. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:13, 29 June 2012 (UTC)